Skip to main content

About your Search

20130211
20130219
STATION
FOXNEWS 11
MSNBC 10
MSNBCW 10
CNN 7
CNNW 7
CSPAN2 6
CSPAN 4
KQED (PBS) 3
KRCB (PBS) 3
KNTV (NBC) 2
WETA 2
KCSM (PBS) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
KQEH (PBS) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 88
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 88 (some duplicates have been removed)
that is a loss in trying to create a bipartisan foreign policy in washington and the reduction was probably one of the most important congressional initiatives that we have ever seen. the idea that you could take that kind of money from the defense budget that didn't make the military very happy and apply it to demilitarizing the strategic arsenal of the former soviet union was extremely important. we go from bush to clinton, clinton didn't want to deal with foreign policy like so many presidents they felt they were elected to do domestic things. clinton had no background in foreign policy, no interest in the foreign policy. people say they went to georgetown, the school really wasn't good enough as i am concerned. i hope i am not offending anyone in georgetown she put together a security team all of them were gone within a year or two for the most part when you look at christopher and the cia was a very peculiar appointment. he did something that needs to be corrected. he was in the foreign policy bureaucracy as i am concerned he brought to the right wing and abolishing the arms control and di
magazine" the latest from david ignatius of the "washington post," tom ricks of "foreign policy," and state department correspondent margaret brennan. we'll round it up on the with amy walt are aim amy walter, michael gerson, and our political director john dickerson. from out in space to here on earth, this is "face the nation." captioning sponsored by cbs from cbs news in washington, "face the nation" with bob schieffer. >> schieffer: and good morning, again on a day when there is no shortage of questions. we welcome dennis mcdonough president obama's me chief of staff, who i presume has brought many answers with him this morning. nice to have you. >> thanks for having me, bob. i'm really looking forward to it. >> schieffer: the sequester these draconian across-the-board spending cuts that are supposed to go into effect march 1. it appears to me that this is anything to happen. it looks to as if both the president and the congressional leaders have given up on each other. can this possibly happen? >> well, we've not give know up on this, bob and the reason we've not given up on this is be
policy front, some of the best foreign policy reporters in the business. david ignatius is with the "washington post," of course. tom ricks used to work for the "poat" is now contributing editor to "foreign policy" magazine and margaret brennan is our cbs news state department correspondent. before we get to foreign subjects here on earth, i want to talk about matters from outer space, and that meteorite that fell over siberia and injured over 1,000 people. so we're going back to new york to talk with the science editor and senior editor of "time" magazine jeffrey chewinger. jeffrey, let me start with the obvious. this thing caught our attention. there's no question about that. should we be worried about this? do these things pose a danger to those of us here on earth? >> well, they do and they don't. there's some comfort to be takenarchs we report in "time" magazine this week, that the earth has been playing in traffic for about 4 billion years now especially the time calmed the heavy bombardment period when the solar system hadn't quite acreeded yet. even today, every
with republicans wanting to flex their muscle on foreign policy. they haven't had many victories in terms of a lot of foreign policy, a lot of their policies have been discreditted by what we have seen over the last years in terms of the prosecution of the war on terror. so i think that's it. but i also think obama didn't do himself any favors by picking hagel. in some ways he's the only guy that wants hagel. democrats are not that excited about having hagel there. republicans are not happy. they want to drag it out. chris: what are you hearing from your reporters? >> i think that's right. the sense is he will be confirmed but there's still more time so we don't know what could happen. something new could come out. >> absolutely. >> change. chris: i think there may be a brilliant strategy. slow it down, slow it down, hope something breaks. bad news comes out of the woodwork. let's talk about something coming up on the subject of the march 1 showdown known as sequester. you wrote your new e-book called "here's the deal" in part, quote, democrats have gone on record as accepting a much longer list o
? that was president obama as a candidate in 2007, running hard against the legacy of the bush-cheney foreign policy. at issue now today the 700% rampup of drone strikes under obama. there have been 350 under obama, largely in pakistan. a key question is blowback, no one knows how many untargeted civilians have been killed by drone strikes or the damage to winning hearts and mind over there. the effect of blowback is a central theme in the television series "homeland" where the main character goes from captured marine to terrorist himself when the son of his kaptur in iraq is killed by a thrown. they watch the american vice president on tv together after that drone strike. >> the images being broadcast on some outlets around the world are the bodies of 83 dead children, allegedly killed in the strike. we believe to be false. created by the terrorists for propaganda purposes. >> and they call us terrorists. chris: they call us terrorists there. david, there's the question, i guess, maybe not the most important question but we're all asking right now. collateral damage. people killed in these drone st
of this committee strongly opposed president obama's foreign-policy. regardless of how we may feel about the president's policies, or float on senator hagel nomination will not change those policies. there is a risk here it is that the defeat of this domination will leave the department of defense leaderless at a time when we face in this budgetary challenges in our military is engaged in combat operations overseas. such an absence of senior leaders would be unlikely to benefit either our national defense or men and away uniform, and i would add, given the recent explosion of a nuclear device by north korea, the delay in adopting this nomination and approving it, i think, will send the exact wrong message to north korea. the president needs to have a secretary of defense in him he has stressed who will give him unvarnished advice, a person of integrity and one who has a personal understanding of the consequences of decisions relative to the use of military force. senator hagel certainly has those critically important qualifications, and he is well qualified to lead department of defense.
is to the left of the obama administration's foreign policy agenda. was on the fringe of the senate. you are talking about a person whose voting record shows softness on iran and and antagonism on israel beyond belief. the fact that they wanted to cloture vote thursday was unreasonable. we voted senator kerry out in the same day because there was no don't veronica moser i have. controversy. we offered to hold the vote until after the break. that wasn't good enough. they wanted to force this issue. so i'm glad that we have got more time to look and i'm glad he answered my question about a very disturbing comment he allegedly made. so i think we doing our job to scrutinize i think one of the most unqualified radical choices for secretary of defense in a very long time. >> chris: well, let me ask you a question about that. if he is so radical and unqualified if you get the information you are seeking on him and on benghazi and we will get to that in a moment, why wouldn't you still continue to try to block him? >> well, because i do believe the president has great deference. can we do bette
of the obama administration's foreign policy agenda. on the fringe of the senate. you are talking about a person whose voting record shows softness on iran and antagonism toward israel beyond belief. he'd be the most antagonistic senator toward the state of israel in history, so the fact that we reported in -- tuesday, wanted a cloture vote thursday was unreasonable and we voted senator kerry on the same day because there was no controversy and offer to the white house to hold the vote until after the break, and, if nothing new came out we'd vote for cloture, senator john mccain and myself, but that wasn't good enough and they wanted to force the issue so i'm glad that we have got more time to look and i'm glad he answered my question, about a very disturbing comment he allegedly made. so i think we're doing our job to scrutinize, i think, one of the most unqualified, radical choices for secretary of defense in a very long time. >> chris: well, let me ask you a question about that. if he is so radical and unqualified, if you get the information you are seeking on him, and on benghazi, w
. john, what do you think? >> he will talk about foreign policy. forbes policy will not be the thrust of the speech. jobs, the economy will be. but when he talks about foreign policy, it's a pretty safe bet north korea will be on his mind. the president set to give that address at 9:00 eastern time. reports indicate that he may do a little bit more finger pointing this time than reaching across the aisle. congressman adam kinzinger, a republican from ill. thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> we're getting previews about how the president may sound tonig, glen thrush of politico says don't expect anything like the call for peaceful collaboration that addressed the joint congress in 2009. >> month of the same. i think this is an opportunity. the president has an amazing opportunity to call republicans and democrats together to say both sides have to accept things they don't want in order to accept the problems in the country and for future generations. that's what's missing, the discussion of what happens next with the next generation of americans and, unfortunately,
talk about foreign policy, it's a direct impact on the department of defense and these are exact questions we should be asking. >> heather: and this is not unprecedented. there are two other times that a cabinet secretary needed 60 votes and both of those bush nominees facing harry reid and democrats and environmental agency head. both had to meet 60 vote threshold. now it has happened to hagel. the third time in ten years. so it's not unprecedented. my question to you, why rush it? >> because the department of defense is responsible for our military. we are currently in conflict right now. i think this is something that has to deal with national security. you really need to get serious and get to work here. we can't be talking about things that are not relevant. they are asking for information about benghazi and chuck hagel had nothing to do with benghazi. if you wanted questions about that you need to talk on other people. >> heather: they got one of those questions answered, that is whether or not president obama himself personally called libyan officials on the night of septe
of the union address here in washington, this is the first foreign policy crisis of his second term. state department officials say the u.s. and its allies in the far east have been spending the last year telling north korean dictator that pyongyang can enjoy better relations in the world if they abandon that you are michael program. the message is stern. >> to address the situation posed by north korea's threatening activity, u.n. security council will deliver a swift and strong response by way of the security council resolution. >> reporter: at around 10:00 last night, u.s. geological survey recorded a seismic event that was twice the magnitude of the second test back in 2009. they say this time is different because it appears not to be an experiment but the test of an operational nuclear bomb. >> it appears this is uranium weapon that has been totally weaponized and capable to be made into a delivery system. a threat that may have bone a decade off before the test, it now appears to be three to five years off with this new breakthrough by the north koreans. >> you heard the general scal
editor for foreign policy magazine. a lot of sources in the pentagon and he just wrote this about chuck hagel, quote, his big problem is that tho one much wants him running the pentagon. the prospect is a real problem now because the next secretary of defense will need to work with congress to reduce the defense budget and work with the military to reshape it to make it relevant for future conflict. at the moment, he appears to lack the political capital and the intellect yul appetite to do the latter. do you think chuck hagel can run the pentagon? >> my inclination has been to give the president the prerogative of deciding who's in his cabinet. i voted for john kerry although i don't agree with much he represents as far as a u.s. senator, but i think he's an honest person and i think the president has the right to decide. with regard to hagel, my first inclination was to give him the benefit of the doubt. i'm for auditing the pentagon. i think there is waste to be found. he's a soldier. served honor bly. i'm starting to have doubts and they are that if you going to run department of de
've covered foreign policy in washington for a long time. can you put this into some kind of perspective, historically? how rare is it for this to happen to a president's nominee? >> well, this is very rare. i mean, it's unprecedented. i covered the john tower nomination. he was the former chairman of the committee of the armed services committee. and that was also something that john mccain brought up yesterday. that's part of the grudge match. he wasn't filibustered because the administration just lost that one. but this filibuster with a recess permits the opposition to keep upping the ante. i mean, one of the things that you and joe are pointing out here is that every time chuck hagel turns a corner, they're flowing something else up there. benghazi wasn't even on his watch. they used it to try to get leverage. to try to get more information about what the president did on that night. did he go to bed? was he calling the pentagon? who was in charge? something that they could have asked in another context. they did get a letter from the white house lawyer yesterday which responded at
at that press podium the first time chuck hagel opines about the president's foreign policy and their disagreements on it. >> i can tell you there were a lot of reporters that were answering to be on this trip to brussels. >> the reasons that are being shown to hold up this nomination, it's not about afghanistan, it's not about a draw john -- >> that's not true. >> in all fairness, what you just mentioned very parochial reasons by the republican party to make this into a dance because chuck hagel didn't like john mccain -- >> there are policy issues here, let's not forget. they did talk about his refusal to denounce hesbola as a terrorist organization. those are legitimate policy concerns which call into question his ability to lead the defense department. >> i want to move into another topic. one of your former boss be, mr. rove. it seems as if republicans are acting what's in their own interest, whether they like the rove project or don't like the rove project. if this works, this looks like this is going to be a very ugly public process in the short-term. is that fair? >>
: the president has two big foreign policies issues he needs to tackle tonight including one we just learned about this morning. can you fill us in on what to expect? >> you can expect some reference to north korea, but don't look for anything new or anything that is going to upset the apple cart as far as the administration believes that as far as north korea is concerned there is sufficient pressure to contain the north korea from the japanese and particularly the chinese in the region. don't look for any new policy from the president on that. afghanistan, this is the president's battle to the pentagon, he's going to pull troops out of afghanistan at a faster pace than his military advisers suggested. he's looking to cut the force in half by 2013. that is quicker than the pentagon officials said they thought would be prudent. >> john: wow, a visit 13-year war. the president is expected to call for compromise and reach common ground but isn't he using congress as a background while talking beyond them and asking voters to pressure congressmen into giving what he wants? isn't that how they perceiv
the arab spring. what are you listening for tonight when it comes to foreign policy? >> well, in foreign policy i think the point jake has made and broken is probably the most important one. i doubt very much you'll hear much about north korea. there will be a condemnation, i imagine. we've been through this, watched this dance before. new leader comes into north korea, needs to show his stuff, needs to consolidate the -- his support with the military, which is the backbone of the military dictatorship, so they do something provocative like this. everyone condemns it. chinese will condemn it but they're the only country who can do anything about it because north korea's the most isolated country in the world and china doesn't want it to collapse. though china provides it with energy and food, it's not going to do anything. so obama doesn't have much actionable he could talk about. with regard to iran, they feel as though they've got the pressure on iran. they are watching to see what happens. and i don't think there's going to be much percentage in talking a great deal about situations t
of foreign policy, and if you look at the fact that he has ended in the war in iraq, he has meandering towards ending the war in afghanistan, he's allowing the pentagon, and you've got to remember when you look at the pentagon, you're looking at an institution that has the fine motor skills of a dinosaur. it takes the pentagon a long time to put together a timetable such as for withdraw. all obama has to do, and i know it's not this simple, but i would look at the experience, came in in 1995, gave the speech in 1996, announcing the bleeding wound, he had nazis tell schulz we were getting out and the military had a year to turn it around, and they wouldn't be able to. 88, they announced the timetable, 89 they were gone. we need to do something similar. military's had its chances. we had 11 commanders in afghanistan in 11 years. look at thomas rick's book "the generals" that devotes a lot of attention to this. that's not a war where we can be successful. it's not the kind of military we have. there's no military that's ever been successful in a counter insurgency, and not only do they ha
political thought when it comes to foreign policy. i think that's fair too. so i think that's what the senate is supposed to do. they're supposed to advise and consent. i think john mccain is doing it exactly like he should do it. he has problems with it, but he's going to let the president put his person in charge. i thought mccain was very fair there. mark? you take some of the things he said in the past, they're pretty bad, but he circled back. he's talked to lindsey. he's assured some other people that those are not his positions today. >> senator hagel has really big shoes to fill. the president's first two defense secretaries, fantastic. worked well with the hill, worked well with the pentagon. i think senator mccain, unlike some of the other critics that chuck hagel, has focused on the things where there really are questions. >> and by the way, again, i support chuck hagel. but they're very legitimate questions. we have to sort out some of the hyperbolic attacks, which are just shameful, versus responsible concerns. john mccain, i felt, was really responsible yesterday, took
, foreign policy we're great at saying, "make sure internet is everywhere." domestically, for some reason, we haven't done so well. so i see internet access as the heart of a democratic society. >> you use that merger of comcast and nbcuniversal as the window in your book into what this power can do to the aspirations of a democratic internet. >> federal regulators today approved the purchase by comcast of a majority stake in nbcuniversal from general electric. this merger will create a $30 billion media company with cable, broadcast, internet, motion picture and theme park components. the deal is expected to close by the end of the month. >> you say that the merger between comcast and nbcuniversal represented a new frightening moment in u.s. regulatory history. how so? >> comcast is not only the nation's largest broadband distributor with tens of millions of customers, it also now owns and controls one of the four media conglomerates in america, nbcuniversal. that means that it has a built-in interest in making sure that it shapes discourse, controls programming all in the service of its
for foreign policy magazine. he'se1 written twox$$(jjju about iraq and he just wrote this -- work with congress and work with the militarye1 to reshape the military to make it relevant fore1qi) t hagel appears to lack thefá intellectual appetiteÑiq to doñrñr the latter. those are verye1 strong words. gr+zu think chuck haggel has been the pentagon? >> my information is evene1q thoughxd i'm a conservative republic to give the president who ist( nnt his -- politically i don't agree with much of anythingqçó in a john g!i +t5ye1. >> i'm forzúditing the pentagon. i think there is ways for it to be found.xd i know you a solee1yme1i] they may have provided financing and i think he needs to reveal that. i'mñ" one that says, yes, iu- need more information about making aá.", final decision. >> do you thinkxd john mccain can filibuster --p, he is in his project in the the the -- the only way to get the information is toe1 threat them to ai] high standard of with he's- essentially sayingteák hat you would very to qme. we do signature strikes now. we don't even
"foreign policy magazine" my position right now is that i want an answer to the question. that question totally unrelated to chuck hagel as defense secretary is what president obama was doing during the benghazi attack. hagel remains in limbo, as does defense secretary leon panetta, who isn't exactly sure when he will be able to return to his california walnut groves. >> this is, i believe, my final press conference here at the pentagon briefing room. there are moments when i thought i was part of the last act of an italian opera. you're not sure exactly when it would end, and when the fat lady would sing. >> for now the only certainty is much more congressional uncertainty. joy, does leon panetta need a shirt that says "i survived a chuck hagel filibuster and all i got was this lousy t-shirt?" just when he thinks it can't get worse, it's actually seemingly gotten worse. >> this is insane. i mean, last night i went through, and i was looking at the george w. bush cabinet nominations. none of which were filibustered. just for fun. just because i knew we were talking about it. his second
of incredibly paranoid mccarthyite apocalyptic view of american foreign policy among some of the characters in the house -- >> doesn't that make the case for why harry should have done, this because of the ted cruzes of the world and the tea parties of the world? they're trying to stop absolutely everything. i do kind of blame harry right now. he had a chance to fix this. david, your thoughts. >> you know, i think that harry reid made a call that the democrats may end up the minority position in the years ahead and he doesn't want to totally get rid of the filibuster. you can blame him, but really you've got to look at the people who are leading this phony charge. and we have to -- the way they're sort of burdening the senate now, so if you don't like what the administration did on benghazi, which is not really a department of defense issue, then you penalize the department of defense by not letting a transition proceed there when we're fighting a war overseas. and you have people like lindsey graham and john mccain who claim to be patriots who care about the pentagon and claim to care abou
. >> were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? were you correct or incorrect, yes or no? >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer on a lot >> warner: on sunday, republican senator lindsey graham said he would put a hold on hagel and on john brennas nonati as c.i.a. director, until he gets more answers from the white house about the september attack in benghazi, libya. in a statement today, white house spokesman josh earnest reaffirmed president obama's support for hagel. and said: late today, reid forced a vote on breaking the fillibuster. the current defense secretary leon panetta who'd been due to leave his post today has said he will stay on until his successor is confirmed. and, at a ceremony honoring for and late today the president said it was unfortunate to have politics intrude while he's still presiding over a war in afghanistan. to help us understand the implications, the politics and what's next, we turn to pentagon reporter mark thompson of "time" magazine. and todd z
are republicans trying to subvert the foreign policy of the united states over an old and bitter grudge? let's bring in ari melber and democrat strategist julian ep sto epstein. what is senator mccain's problem? is he trying to defend a mode okur president bush or is he trying to defend a failed war in iraq? >> i think it's more iraq where we know senator mccain has long stood by our presence there and adding troops there, but bottom line if you take this as the mccain filibuster standard, then no one in any democratic administration ever gets a vote because, guess what? a lot of them have good faith and i think well-grounded disagreements with george w. bush. so this cannot be the standard. it's not defensible on its own terms and that's the problem. they are erecting a supermajority hurdle for all of this legislation and all of these nominees. this is an old problem from the way the republicans have been acting and it doesn't stand up because by this standard again you would not let anyone serve in government that you di agreed with. >> but it's based on a grudge. it's based on a bitter gr
, but imagine this, the foreign policy of libertarian minded conservative republicans like rand paul has more in common with chuck hagel than it does with john mccain. they are opposed to intervention. they're in favor of cutting defense budgets as part of an overrecall reduction in government spending. so libertarians like the idea of chuck hagel, who wants to be part of cuts and who wants to be less interventionist. remember, libertarians want to bring the troops home just as much as many liberals used to when george w. bush was president. so it's complicated for rand paul. he says he's fighting hagel on these principle grounds as it relates to benghazi, as it relates to the disclosure of documents and other things. but if libertarians had their way, they would prefer him to the guy who was just in there, leon panetta. >> rand paul is an intriguing character, if for no other reason than he always maintainses a very, very calm demeanor, but fires some heavy broadsides at the same time, one of which he fired at secretary of state hillary clinton during the benghazi hearing. let's take listen
administration. it was very nice of him to bring up foreign policy, because in fact he has not been transparent at all about his drone war or his kill list or any of the other things that have to be leaked for us to find out about. we still don't know what he was doing the night of the attack in benghazi. not just the night of the attack in benghazi but also the night on the attack on the cairo embassy and other embassies in the middle east. if he is transparent, you know, this is sort of basic information that he should provide. >> bret: so you agree that for these senators to say hey, we need this information, it's okay for them to hold up even national security cabinet position for some time to get it. >> the president should be given extreme deference in appointing his members of his cabinet. the way john bolton was treated was terrible. i said that at the time. i think there has to be a real reason. in this situation, i think he will be confirmed but it is sad that lindsey graham has the hold up a nomination to find out where the president was the night of the terrorist attack. i mean some
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 88 (some duplicates have been removed)